To start out, you should know that I grew up with guns, I like guns, I don't have a problem with guns or responsible people that own guns (I do own a gun).

To me, the big picture is pretty obvious when it comes to this subject. We can dispute the finer points of which gun kills more effectively and/or efficiently all day long, doesn't fucking matter.

I see the "gun culture" the same way I see religion. It was necessary at one time, it was essential as a tool for our survival. Before we as a species were able to exist as we exist today with the technologies and industries we now have available, being able to kill shit with the pull of a trigger was definitely an advantage to have, and definitely worth the risk of owning such a destructive device.

Religion was once a useful construct of an ignorant species. It was useful for instruction and explanation. However, we no longer need religion for anything, and it's presence is more harmful than helpful. In fact, due to human nature it always has been, even if in the right hands it could have been nothing but a good thing.

Both guns and religion are harmless in and of themselves, it's the idiots among us that turn these things into dangerous things.

It's a pretty simple equation. The american gun culture produces a very high gun casualty rate. You live by the sword...........

So the simple solution to the big picture is to get rid of the killing tool. If kids can't play nicely with swords, you take away the fucking swords. I don't care how good you are with your sword, we have a big problem with swords and for the benefit of everybody the only answer is to get rid of them.

Again, I'm not placing the blame on the guns. I'm placing the blame on the culture and the inability of america to own guns responsibly as a whole.

Just like religion, if you look at the history of how the gun has been utilized in the past couple of centuries you can't tell me that it hasn't killed more people than it's saved.

I'm not calling for gun control. I'm not stupid. America will never give up our guns, and really I'm not sure that I want them to.

I don't think that they should under law.

I think that people should be congnizant enough of a problem to be able to put a dangerous thing down on their own, simply because it's fucking dangerous and unnecessary and an obvious problem in our society.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems a simple enough concept to me. I've accepted that it's a no-win situation. I want people to be able to protect themselves, but I also want people to not have to carry a gun on them to do so. The only way for that to happen is if nobody has a goddamn gun.

I'm kinda getting to a George Carlin point of view. People are stupid and crazy and aren't going to get better so we might as well say fuck it, whatever, and watch the whole circus fuck itself and at least try to enjoy the show. I just don't enjoy preventable death all that much. Sorry.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

(26-04-2014 07:04 AM)Cathym112 Wrote: You understand that self defense occurs outside the home as well? I carry a pistol on my body at all times. It doesn't matter where I am.

Self defense doesn't not mean home defense.

We were talking specifically about the situation of a uninvited person in your home at the same time as you. Whether they are likely to be a person wanting to do physical harm to you or whether they are likely to be a confussed drunk person.
It makes no sense to switch the emphasis like you have done. This is deflection.

(26-04-2014 07:04 AM)Cathym112 Wrote: My stickler for the terms is important because the subtle nuance actually changes what you are talking about. If you say "semi-automatic firearms", you include pistols and revolvers in that discussion.

Yes, I am concerned about the dangers that the gun presents rather than the label put on the gun. If you have a semi automatic rifle with a 50 round mag then it is similar to a semi automatic pistol with a 50 round mag.
Of course the rifle will be much more accurate though, but the pistol is easier to conceal.

It would make no sense what-so-ever for me to get scared of the ability for a gun to switch between firing modes. It is the modes themselves that present the danger rather than the ability to switch between them.

(26-04-2014 07:04 AM)Cathym112 Wrote: Do you know how fast I can empty my gun with maximum mag capacity (10 rounds)? Less than 5 seconds. Do you know how fast I can change my magazine in my 9 mm pistol and chamber a round? Less than 3 seconds. Do you know how many targets I can hit with 10 rounds? 10.

The bizzare thing, when talking to anti gun restriction people is that they often use these silly arguments.
Oh but I can fire off heaps of rounds very quickly even with a pump action, Oh but a person is more likely to die with a stab wound than with a bullet wound. Oh, I'd rather die quickly by a bullet than a lengthy death by a knife.

If these people really think knives or bolt action guns or pump actions guns or pistols are so dangerous then how do they reconcile that armies go in with assault rifles at the ready rather than their knives unsheathed?

How does a person reconcile that they can sit atop their roof alone and fight off an "army" of armed rioters when USA sends tens of thousands of people to war. Why don't USA just send one elite soldier to win the war? Rambo could do it right?

(26-04-2014 07:04 AM)Cathym112 Wrote: Btw - have you ever seen a gun fire?

I've been skeet shooting, I've shot and killed magpies with a shot gun. I have shot and killed possums, rabbits and cats with a 22, I have shot and killed rabbits, and birds with several air rifles, I have used an air pistol. I have used pistols, and a 308 at a shooting range. I have had a fire arms licence which I gained by taking some courses, sitting a test and having a background check done.

Sorry - I stopped paying attention when you said rifles are more accurate than pistols. And when you accused me of changing the subject when I did no such thing. I was talking about self defense and always have. Home defense is an aspect of self defense.

Chas has it right. It's like arguing creationism with you. You don't understand the science behind guns and what is worse you don't care to. It's frustrating and I'm done wasting my time.

As far as your firearms license, I call bullshit. Or, I say its a worthless piece of paper since clearly you didn't have to demonstrate any knowledge of firearms in order to get it!

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson

Rifles differ from handguns in the length of the barrel and the presence of a butt stock. They are harder to carry, are poorly concealable, and more loosely regulated than handguns. However, they are much more accurate and shoot more powerful cartridges than handguns.

Quote:For those of you not accustomed to firearms, let me tell you what every firearm enthusiast knows: rifles out perform handguns. In almost every way that can be measured, rifles are superior.

Obviously, rifles can shoot farther. However, most people cannot fathom how much farther. Many handguns drastically lose power after ten feet. Most lose any kind of real power after 30 feet. In contrast, most rifles can shoot accurately up to a quarter-mile. Many can shoot over a mile.

Rifles are more accurate. The same amount of time it takes a bullet to fall from your hand to the floor is actually the same amount a time a it takes a bullet in flight to fall the same distance. Bullets coming out of rifles are moving two to three times as fast as those coming out of pistols. That greater speed lends to greater accuracy.

These articles don't even mention the obvious aspect with regards to the leverage you are able to get in just holding a rifle, much easier to point accurately at your target.

If you think a pistol is as accurate as a rifle, I think you need to try to work out why snipers use rifles rather than pistols given that accuracy is their No1 concern.

No matter what the size of the bullet, every round fired that doesn’t hit its intended target is a big problem. “Stray rounds” fail to stop the immediate, potentially lethal threat. Equally, they’re dangerous to the health and safety of innocent people unfortunate enough to get in the rounds’ path.

Rifle have more points of contact with the shooter’s body than a handgun: both hands, shoulder and cheek. This makes a rifle a substantially more stable shooting platform than a handgun [note "handgun" singular]. This is one of the main reasons why an average shooter is far more accurate with a rifle than a handgun.

This is just super obvious stuff if you have ever had any experience of shooting with a rifle and shooting with a pistol.
I'm surprised that you think a pistol is more accurate than a rifle. It's bizzare actually.

(26-04-2014 03:19 PM)evenheathen Wrote: I think that people should be congnizant enough of a problem to be able to put a dangerous thing down on their own, simply because it's fucking dangerous and unnecessary and an obvious problem in our society.

A firearm is not unnecessary. See below.

Quote:Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems a simple enough concept to me. I've accepted that it's a no-win situation. I want people to be able to protect themselves, but I also want people to not have to carry a gun on them to do so. The only way for that to happen is if nobody has a goddamn gun.

Yes, you are wrong.

Just because the 6'4", 250 lb., knife-wielding goon who is threatening me doesn't have a gun doesn't mean I shouldn't. It would be my only effective defense.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.

Rifles differ from handguns in the length of the barrel and the presence of a butt stock. They are harder to carry, are poorly concealable, and more loosely regulated than handguns. However, they are much more accurate and shoot more powerful cartridges than handguns.

Quote:For those of you not accustomed to firearms, let me tell you what every firearm enthusiast knows: rifles out perform handguns. In almost every way that can be measured, rifles are superior.

Obviously, rifles can shoot farther. However, most people cannot fathom how much farther. Many handguns drastically lose power after ten feet. Most lose any kind of real power after 30 feet. In contrast, most rifles can shoot accurately up to a quarter-mile. Many can shoot over a mile.

Rifles are more accurate. The same amount of time it takes a bullet to fall from your hand to the floor is actually the same amount a time a it takes a bullet in flight to fall the same distance. Bullets coming out of rifles are moving two to three times as fast as those coming out of pistols. That greater speed lends to greater accuracy.

These articles don't even mention the obvious aspect with regards to the leverage you are able to get in just holding a rifle, much easier to point accurately at your target.

If you think a pistol is as accurate as a rifle, I think you need to try to work out why snipers use rifles rather than pistols given that accuracy is their No1 concern.

No matter what the size of the bullet, every round fired that doesn’t hit its intended target is a big problem. “Stray rounds” fail to stop the immediate, potentially lethal threat. Equally, they’re dangerous to the health and safety of innocent people unfortunate enough to get in the rounds’ path.

Rifle have more points of contact with the shooter’s body than a handgun: both hands, shoulder and cheek. This makes a rifle a substantially more stable shooting platform than a handgun [note "handgun" singular]. This is one of the main reasons why an average shooter is far more accurate with a rifle than a handgun.

This is just super obvious stuff if you have ever had any experience of shooting with a rifle and shooting with a pistol.
I'm surprised that you think a pistol is more accurate than a rifle. It's bizzare actually.

Oh, you were suddenly making distinctions between long range vs close range? And here I thought you didn't bother with differences?

And at close range, my pistol is far more accurate :-)

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson

(26-04-2014 03:19 PM)evenheathen Wrote: Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems a simple enough concept to me. I've accepted that it's a no-win situation. I want people to be able to protect themselves, but I also want people to not have to carry a gun on them to do so. The only way for that to happen is if nobody has a goddamn gun.

Yes, you are wrong.

Just because the 6'4", 250 lb., knife-wielding goon who is threatening me doesn't have a gun doesn't mean I shouldn't. It would be my only effective defense.

It's also the most effective and most easily accessible weapon of choice for idiots. I trust you with a gun, Chas. I don't trust humanity with them. The track record is pretty convincing.

I'm not saying it's a good answer to gun violence, just that as I see it it's the only effective answer we have. And again I don't expect it to happen, that would be ideal, not real.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

These articles don't even mention the obvious aspect with regards to the leverage you are able to get in just holding a rifle, much easier to point accurately at your target.

If you think a pistol is as accurate as a rifle, I think you need to try to work out why snipers use rifles rather than pistols given that accuracy is their No1 concern.

EDIT: here is an article regarding leverage.http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/12...e-defense/
This is just super obvious stuff if you have ever had any experience of shooting with a rifle and shooting with a pistol.
I'm surprised that you think a pistol is more accurate than a rifle. It's bizzare actually.

Oh, you were suddenly making distinctions between long range vs close range? And here I thought you didn't bother with differences?

And at close range, my pistol is far more accurate :-)

Not intrinsically more accurate, but effectively so.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.

Just because the 6'4", 250 lb., knife-wielding goon who is threatening me doesn't have a gun doesn't mean I shouldn't. It would be my only effective defense.

It's also the most effective and most easily accessible weapon of choice for idiots. I trust you with a gun, Chas. I don't trust humanity with them. The track record is pretty convincing.

I'm not saying it's a good answer to gun violence, just that as I see it it's the only effective answer we have. And again I don't expect it to happen, that would be ideal, not real.

OK, I re-read your post and I see that you were venting. I absolutely agree that the violence in U.S. society is not caused by guns, yet is sometimes exacerbated by guns.

There should be more uniform, practical, and effective regulation.
But what is really needed is better mental health care, better education, and better economic opportunity to address the root causes of the violence.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.

(26-04-2014 04:10 PM)Chas Wrote: OK, I re-read your post and I see that you were venting. I absolutely agree that the violence in U.S. society is not caused by guns, yet is sometimes exacerbated by guns.

There should be more uniform, practical, and effective regulation.
But what is really needed is better mental health care, better education, and better economic opportunity to address the root causes of the violence.

Agreed, and thank you. But also, we're not talking violence, but gun violence in particular. Gun violence is indeed exasberated by guns.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.